Disagreeing with Obama's policies does not equate with your statement. Those who truly feel what you're expressing, and have already decided, are at odds with the idea of this man as president, which in my opinion is irrational.

I'll accept (but disagree with) one who says that the stimulus (which was successful) should have been replaced by trickle-down economics (which has never actually worked, and would take years anyway).

I'll accept (but disagree with) one who says that the healtcare reform pay-in mandate (which actually eliminates decades of freeloading that repubs have complained about) should be replaced with some other form of cost control (as of yet unspecified by repubs).

But I can't accept your categorization of Obama without some justification. And I'm well aware that you don't give a rat's ass what I think, but I'm merely stating that I don't believe the justification has been put out there, should you decide to enlighten us. Because right now, it sounds an awful lot like Sarah Palin's "real Americans" mumbo-jumbo.

That's a laughable conclusion. Clearly, the recession had ended, followed by leveling-off of job losses, followed by job growth. It's called an expansion. Same exact thing's happening now: recession ends June '09, job losses level-off Oct '09, followed by job growth. Happened during Reagan, and Clinton. None involved pathetic $100 bribe checks.

Considering the evidence that 1-percenters like Romney pay extremely low tax rates, it would seem to underscore the fact that the entire &quot;trickle-down&quot; concept is a straw man.

Most people that are married professionals with 10+ yrs of experience and make $250,000 are part of the 1%.

I can tell you that I pay well over the cost of an ///M3 every year in taxes. I also work for very affluent individual and we do pay significant taxes. It amazing that people still believe that the wealthy does not pay their fair share.

Words are weapons and liberals that say "my secretary pays less in taxes than I do" are just plain lying or shockingly ignorant. Yes the effective tax rate paid may be less (but not always) but the difference in actual dollars contributed is huge. And when you throw in the substantial numbers of "tax payers" that actually pay no tax whatsoever it's beyond disingenuous to make the argument. I pay enough each year to float a middle class family but certainly collect waaaaay less in government benefits from those payments than that family does. If we are going to debate our insane tax code the least the libs could do is tell the truth.

And when you throw in the substantial numbers of "tax payers" that actually pay no tax whatsoever it's beyond disingenuous to make the argument.

What's disengenuous is your statement - most people pay taxes, except for the elderly on SSI. Even low-income people contribute payroll taxes, state and other taxes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldArmy

If we are going to debate our insane tax code the least the libs could do is tell the truth.

We tell the truth, you lie. Truth: we have had a graduated tax system for around 80 years, and the top tier is near it's lowest level in history. Graduated tax rates are not class warfare, they are logical and fair, that's why they've always been like that.
Truth: the upper 40% of incomes pay about the same flat rate today, rather than a graduated rate, because of years of political influence.

And the liberal news media talking heads say this all the time. It's a lie to facilitate class warfare pure and simple.

And even the basic premise of the liberal argument is dead wrong:

"But there is more: On average, however, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more in taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center. This year, households making more than $1 million will pay, on average, 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes. A household making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay 15 percent of its income in federal taxes, which includes income taxes and Social Security payroll taxes. The 10 percent of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70 percent of federal income taxes, according to the Congressional Budget Office. "Stephen Ohlemacher, The Associated Press

(Sorry, this is kinda crude. Best I could do in ten seconds of interweb surfing.)

And the liberal news media talking heads say this all the time. It's a lie to facilitate class warfare pure and simple.

And even the basic premise of the liberal argument is dead wrong:

"But there is more: On average, however, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more in taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center. This year, households making more than $1 million will pay, on average, 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes. A household making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay 15 percent of its income in federal taxes, which includes income taxes and Social Security payroll taxes. The 10 percent of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70 percent of federal income taxes, according to the Congressional Budget Office. "Stephen Ohlemacher, The Associated Press

(Sorry, this is kinda crude. Best I could do in ten seconds of interweb surfing.)

Since they say a picture is worth a thousand words here are a couple charts from IRS data that prove the point that the rich are paying more than their fair share. We don't have a tax rate problem we have a big spending problem. The freeloaders can never get enough of other peoples money.

And the liberal news media talking heads say this all the time. It's a lie to facilitate class warfare pure and simple. And even the basic premise of the liberal argument is dead wrong.

This is a straw man; everyone knows that "higher taxes" refers to tax rates. A tax, by definition, is a percentage or rate. The only person trying to facilitate class warfare is YOU, with your liberal this and liberal that, and your refusal to accept the graduated tax system that our society is built upon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldArmy

"But there is more: On average, however, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more in taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center. This year, households making more than $1 million will pay, on average, 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes. A household making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay 15 percent of its income in federal taxes, which includes income taxes and Social Security payroll taxes. The 10 percent of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70 percent of federal income taxes, according to the Congressional Budget Office. "Stephen Ohlemacher, The Associated Press

Most people that are married professionals with 10+ yrs of experience and make $250,000 are part of the 1%.

I can tell you that I pay well over the cost of an ///M3 every year in taxes. I also work for very affluent individual and we do pay significant taxes. It amazing that people still believe that the wealthy does not pay their fair share.

It class warfare or envy. Plain and simple.

this is very true, it is a class envy. and i wish more people did some more simple math before agreeing with the media and liberal propaganda(s) that the rich isnt paying fair.

average income in U.S. from 2006 - 2010 is $51,916 by the census.

the ideal average income most of the average income wage earners would consider any one "the rich" lets say would be million per year.

so this is my question to those who think its unfair...

(based on the variables stated above)

if "the rich" has 9% ($90,000) income tax rate and average wage earner has 35% ($18,170)tax rate, who pays more tax per year?

plus a lot of these "rich" folks (those who invest) with gains they already paid taxes on and gets taxed again (15% tax of gain) when they gain from the investment... so its basically a double dip by the IRS to the "rich" if you ask me.

plus i dont think "the rich" has any tax returns that they are so eagerly waiting to see in their mail box either.

this is very true, it is a class envy. and i wish more people did some more simple math before agreeing with the media and liberal propaganda(s) that the rich isnt paying fair.

average income in U.S. from 2006 - 2010 is $51,916 by the census.

the ideal average income most of the average income wage earners would consider any one "the rich" lets say would be million per year.

so this is my question to those who think its unfair...

(based on the variables stated above)

if "the rich" has 9% ($90,000) income tax rate and average wage earner has 35% ($18,170)tax rate, who pays more tax per year?

plus a lot of these "rich" folks (those who invest) with gains they already paid taxes on and gets taxed again (15% tax of gain) when they gain from the investment... so its basically a double dip by the IRS to the "rich" if you ask me.

plus i dont think "the rich" has any tax returns that they are so eagerly waiting to see in their mail box either.

Oh........ My........... God.......
This thread will be a permanent record of how moronic the right-wingers are!

For the 4th time now, can we please stop talking about total tax dollars?!?!?!?!?OF COURSE as you earn more income, you're paying more dollars in tax - this is true as long as the rate is not zero; nobody disagrees with this statement.

So let's look at your wonderful example: the rich guy makes 20 times as much, but only contributes 5 times the tax revenue - yeah, I'd say that's pretty fuk'd up, and for the sake of humanity, you'd better all think that's fuk'd up.

So one guy has $33K to live on, while the other guy has $910K - so now the 20-fold income disparity is a 27.5-fold net cash disparity. Good going! Yeah, let's tax the shit out of the middle-class guy's live-or-die money, while taking almost nothing from the wealthy guy's discretionary million.

Look, I didn't invent graduated tax rates, but they're the foundation of a functioning capitalistic society. But you guys have gone off the deep-end, wanting to tax discretionary income at a substantially lower rate than essential income. That's not the way it works for the lower 80% of earners in this country, and there's no rationale for the top 20% to be nearly exempt from getting fairly taxed.

plus a lot of these "rich" folks (those who invest) with gains they already paid taxes on and gets taxed again (15% tax of gain) when they gain from the investment... so its basically a double dip by the IRS to the "rich" if you ask me.

Yeah, I forgot to mention, this statement is moronic as well.

People invest money they paid income taxes on, and then only the further gains made on that money get taxed, duh. So the only "double-dip" is the poster.

Taxes exist to fund governmental activities, from building bridges to paying firefighters and teachers, etc.

These expenses are paid for in absolute dollars. Not relative percentages. It costs x dollars to build a bridge or pay a teacher for a period of time, or whatever.

I am not a member of the 1%. My boss is. When we both drive across the same bridge, we are both enjoying the same value of that service. Due to the tax structure, he pays more in absolute dollars than I do. So, he has in effect paid for a bigger piece of that bridge than I have. Depending on how clever his accountant is, his net effective tax rate may be less than mine, but I know that the total dollars he pays is more than me. Since the price of the bridge does not change depending on the tax rate paid by those who drive across it, that proves that he has paid for more of that bridge than I have.

I can also assure you that he does not enjoy more value from that bridge than I do, despite the fact that he paid more than me for the right to use it. To get to the same point on the other side, he saves the same number of minutes as I do, compared to driving around. Therefore, the cost he pays per minute to enjoy that extra "free" time is higher than what I pay.

I suppose I could argue that his rate should increase even further, so that difference between his cost per minute and my cost per minute is even greater, if I were interested in some naive form of "social justice" or "class fairness".

However, at some point he would probably come to the conclusion that the gap in cost to him, compared to the gap in benefit (which is nothing), is too much to grin and bear it, and would start to look for other opportunities elsewhere. The economy is global, just ask anyone whose job has moved overseas. Do you really want to give those in power another incentive to shift things even more? Do you really think the financial acumen of the 1%ers is such that their understanding of the laffer curve will be trumped by some idealistic desire to enforce some kind of social equality?

Note: I'm not asking if you think they SHOULD act that way, I'm asking if you think they WILL act that way. For every Warren Buffet there are many others who are notably silent regarding their desire to be taxed more.

Every one of you that has been declared moronic must report immediately for reeducation. The needle-dicked dweezel has condemned you and you must cease posting until you get your head right. That is all.....

I can assure you that he does not enjoy more value from that bridge than I do, despite the fact that he paid more than me for the right to use it.

However, at some point he would probably come to the conclusion that the gap in cost to him, compared to the gap in benefit (which is nothing), is too much to grin and bear it, and would start to look for other opportunities elsewhere. The economy is global, just ask anyone whose job has moved overseas. Do you really want to give those in power another incentive to shift things even more? Do you really think the financial acumen of the 1%ers is such that their understanding of the laffer curve will be trumped by some idealistic desire to enforce some kind of social equality?

With all due respect to your wordy example, this is some major messed-up kind of logic.

No one pays for the "right" to use any of the services of their collective taxes. A simpler example can be made by your property tax, much of which pays for your local schools. Those who don't have kids in school often complain about having to pay the tax, but that's just how taxes work. Whether I live in a $100K house and send 6 kids to school, or a $2M house with no kids, my very large or very small property taxes go to the school. It's a collective, just like auto insurance, or health insurance. None of these have any necessary correlation between contribution and benefit.

This whole top tax rate discussion is bullshit. Not long ago, the top rate was 70%. There's no law that says that it must be 34% or less, they should be able to make it whatever the hell they need. A 5% increase in the marginal rate for incomes above $250K would have a negligible impact on taxpayers, but would substantially increase revenue. One would need to have an AGI well over $250K before the rate change would be noticeable, plus it would be an incentive for investment.

Just as a person with an income of $25K shouldn't pay a 30% tax rate, we need to get a higher rate from those with higher discretionary incomes. It's still just a percentage - if you make an extra dollar, you'll take home a substantial portion of that dollar. It's all very logical; we're not going to pay for our services on the backs of those making $18K, so we either stick with the graduated tax system, or scrap it entirely.

Every one of you that has been declared moronic must report immediately for reeducation. The needle-dicked dweezel has condemned you and you must cease posting until you get your head right. That is all.....

Why must you make these useless posts? Evidently, your ego requires that you must portray the opposition as some sort of asshole. Who made you the god of this forum?

I have a theory - you stoop to juvenile name-calling when you don't have a counter argument. And yes, I absolutely believe that erroneously declaring money to be double-taxed is rightfully characterized as moronic, whereas calling me a "needle-dicked dweezel [sic]" is just pathetic.

Why must you make these useless posts? Evidently, your ego requires that you must portray the opposition as some sort of asshole. Who made you the god of this forum?

I have a theory - you stoop to juvenile name-calling when you don't have a counter argument. And yes, I absolutely believe that erroneously declaring money to be double-taxed is rightfully characterized as moronic, whereas calling me a "needle-dicked dweezel [sic]" is just pathetic.

Hey, you like trying to lure victims into your descending spiral, subject changing, infinite do-loop, google and wiki fueled arguments over minutia and end with a throw down insult.

I like poking you when you put on your wrong headed, lecturing, insulting pissant professor hat.

With all due respect to your wordy example, this is some major messed-up kind of logic.

No one pays for the "right" to use any of the services of their collective taxes. A simpler example can be made by your property tax, much of which pays for your local schools. Those who don't have kids in school often complain about having to pay the tax, but that's just how taxes work. Whether I live in a $100K house and send 6 kids to school, or a $2M house with no kids, my very large or very small property taxes go to the school. It's a collective, just like auto insurance, or health insurance. None of these have any necessary correlation between contribution and benefit.

This whole top tax rate discussion is bullshit. Not long ago, the top rate was 70%. There's no law that says that it must be 34% or less, they should be able to make it whatever the hell they need. A 5% increase in the marginal rate for incomes above $250K would have a negligible impact on taxpayers, but would substantially increase revenue. One would need to have an AGI well over $250K before the rate change would be noticeable, plus it would be an incentive for investment.

Just as a person with an income of $25K shouldn't pay a 30% tax rate, we need to get a higher rate from those with higher discretionary incomes. It's still just a percentage - if you make an extra dollar, you'll take home a substantial portion of that dollar. It's all very logical; we're not going to pay for our services on the backs of those making $18K, so we either stick with the graduated tax system, or scrap it entirely.

From each according to their ability, to each according to their means...Right? Good talking with you scotch, you have to pay multitudes more in percent and multitudes of multitudes by absolute value by virtue of having, excellent thinking scotch. Notice the paragraph on the top of the numbers you posted, clearly a complete objective account of information, despite it being at odds with almost every other figure out there.

Scotch just say your pissed at everyone who makes more money than you and by god your going to be the great regulator you need to be to pull them down to your level.

And because its totally relevant to this thread, as someone who just graduated college, i got back more on my Tax return than i put in, Thanks quality accountant!! I seriously considered not signing the paper, than i thought, their going to be taking fair more than whats fair this coming year, i may as well take it while i can get it... This is the system you live in, you don't make much? congratulations your tax "return" is that fantastic free bonus you have been waiting on!

Keep acting like the rich arent paying their fair share scotch, while your busy with that, im going to see people in the company I now manage working a day before deciding, "i dont like waking up early for work, plus i make just as much with welfare un-employed than i do employed" This isnt a hypothetical, it happens several times a year. We hear the same things with our gov assisted customers even more often.

From each according to their ability, to each according to their means...Right? Good talking with you scotch, you have to pay multitudes more in percent and multitudes of multitudes by absolute value by virtue of having, excellent thinking scotch. Notice the paragraph on the top of the numbers you posted, clearly a complete objective account of information, despite it being at odds with almost every other figure out there.

Scotch just say your pissed at everyone who makes more money than you and by god your going to be the great regulator you need to be to pull them down to your level.

And because its totally relevant to this thread, as someone who just graduated college, i got back more on my Tax return than i put in, Thanks quality accountant!! I seriously considered not signing the paper, than i thought, their going to be taking fair more than whats fair this coming year, i may as well take it while i can get it... This is the system you live in, you don't make much? congratulations your tax "return" is that fantastic free bonus you have been waiting on!

Keep acting like the rich arent paying their fair share scotch, while your busy with that, im going to see people in the company I now manage working a day before deciding, "i dont like waking up early for work, plus i make just as much with welfare un-employed than i do employed" This isnt a hypothetical, it happens several times a year. We hear the same things with our gov assisted customers even more often.

honestly, I don't know what the fuck you're talking about, or what your point is. I'm fairly wealthy, many of my friends and family are wealthy, I applaud wealth.

I don't understand this idea of "charity"; taxes are just a percent of your earnings - for every dollar you earn, you have to pay tax, that's it. What's so fucking difficult? If you want to live in our society, just pay your fucking taxes, and move on.

Years ago, my father, who was a small business owner, was in the 50% bracket, so I don't know what all you selfish pissants are complaining about. You all claim to be so business savvy, but you can't accept the basics of having a functioning government. You know, there are people out there struggling to feed their families, so think about that the next time you buy those performance headers, or that full-body skirt kit, and tell me about your hard life.

honestly, I don't know what the fuck you're talking about, or what your point is. I'm fairly wealthy, many of my friends and family are wealthy, I applaud wealth.

I don't understand this idea of "charity"; taxes are just a percent of your earnings - for every dollar you earn, you have to pay tax, that's it. What's so fucking difficult? If you want to live in our society, just pay your fucking taxes, and move on.

Years ago, my father, who was a small business owner, was in the 50% bracket, so I don't know what all you selfish pissants are complaining about. You all claim to be so business savvy, but you can't accept the basics of having a functioning government. You know, there are people out there struggling to feed their families, so think about that the next time you buy those performance headers, or that full-body skirt kit, and tell me about your hard life.

And the truth comes out.... Because your dad payed 50% everyone else should have to, im sorry he got screwed but its no need to screw others.

So taxes are charity now? we arent charitable? interesting.

You know what i thought about when i purchased my headers last month, i worked my ass off to get these headers, and this is gonna be sweet! Keep believing welfare is used for only people that need it, i see these people every day. Im not going to get too far into what i currently do, But it is a regular occurrence for our customers and employees to drop our service or quit working for us because they prefer to collect welfare over working or going to school.

You keep wanting to deny that fact that these percentages turn into an absolute value in dollars collected.

Scotch, your resorting to calling those ho disagree names and disparaging us because we disagree with your flawed reality. It makes no difference to me, though it is telling about you.

P.S. look at every democrat spewing your redistribution of wealth nonsense and how much they donate to charity compared to those on my side. Keep your charity comments to your self. If you agree with the re-distribution of wealth just admit to it. We all already think you want a "from each according to ability to each according to their means" system. The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem scotch.